Pages

Wednesday, 23 November 2011

Raging bull

The Bulldog Club of America makes a controversial claim in this week's New York Times Magazine's damning cover story on Bulldogs.

Distancing itself from UK data which put the Bulldog's median age of death at just over six years old, a spokesperson for the Bulldog Club of America insists that US bulldogs are healthier than those in England.

Great... so what is the average of age death for the Bulldog in America, then?

Er, they don't know. No one has done the work, or not recently at least - although US vet school data gathered between 1980 and 1990 found that the average age of death in Bulldogs was just 4.6 years.

But perhaps there is other data to support the BCA's claim in the article that US bulldogs are healthy? Well, no, there isn't. In fact, the OFA lists the Bulldog as the breed worst affected by hip dysplasia (over 70 per cent of dogs tested are dysplastic); and a recent paper exploring causes of death in US dogs found that the Bulldog was the breed most likely (18 per cent) to die due to respiratory problems and was only beaten by the Newfoundland as the breed most likely to die from congenital problems.

The New York Times' long and thoroughly-researched article, by writer Benoit Denizet-Lewis, is a real indictment of what we have done to the Bulldog and it makes for painful reading. Breeders will no doubt find reason to dismiss the piece for including quotes from the the HSUS's Wayne Pacelle, but the testimony from expert after expert on the breed's many health woes is compelling.

Particularly worrying, for me, is that in 1973, the Bulldog ranked just 41 in the AKC's most popular breeds whereas in 2010 it was number 6. It is now the most popular breed in Los Angeles (where, surely, they can barely venture outside in summer?).

Of equal concern is that the Bulldog Club of America has no intention of changing the breed standard to encourage a healthier phenotype - and the AKC has no plans to make them, saying it trusts the BCA to "know what's best for the breed."

As such the US breed standard - depressingly - still calls for the Bulldog to have a "massive short-faced head", an "extremely" short face and for the head and face to be "covered with heavy heavy wrinkles" - features which are clearly detrimental to health and welfare and which have been moderated in the UK standard, although not without protest. (I should say that there is little evidence that UK breeders are taking much notice of the new standard, but at least it's in place.)

Incidentally, it's not the first time that Bulldog health has made the cover of a top US magazine. Time Magazine's 2001 "A Terrible Beauty" cover story caused huge ripples at the time. Have a look at that cover from 10 years ago, though, and what stands out is how unexaggerated the Bulldog on the cover is compared to many Bulldogs today. Underneath is a front-shot of a dog previously featured in profile on this blog - one of the top-winning UK bulldogs of 2011, Ch Pringham's Eclair Glace. And underneath that, in case anyone thinks current US bulldogs are less exaggerated, is a US Bulldog featured in the NY Times article.

49 comments:

"While the British Kennel Club, in addition to changing its breed standards, has banned the registration of puppies from closely related parents, the A.K.C. has refused to follow suit. Wayne Pacelle, the Humane Society C.E.O., told me that if the A.K.C. and breed clubs won’t act, it’s inevitable that animal welfare groups will push for legal standards addressing inbreeding and the physical soundness and genetic health of dogs. “Breeding certainly has a place in the world of dogs, but this mania about achieving what’s considered a ‘perfect’ or desirable outward appearance rather than focusing on the physical soundness of the animal is one of the biggest dog-welfare problems in this country,” he said. “And the emotional and financial cost of these sick dogs to their owners is enormous.”"

What's that saying about digging your own grave? Making your bed and lying in it?

I know next to nothing about Bulldogs (except to say that they don't look the same as they did when I was a young lad), but from the two photos you would think they were two different breeds entirely wouldn't you? And perhaps in a way they are. Given that the BCA are trying to distance their breed from the UK breed, those two pictures may well add weight to their argument. Time magazine is a U.S publication, so it would be fair to assume they would use a U.S dog for the covershot, would it not? What do the U.S bulldogs of today look like? Did the UK Bulldogs of 10 years ago look more like the dog on the cover than they do now? I think that using photo's of two dogs of the same breed but born years apart is a good way of showing the changes, but Jemima, you know you're going to take some flak here purely because the two dogs come from opposite sides of the Atlantic and so there are bound to be differences. I'm not saying that's the truth of the matter, just that the naysayers will jump on this. Add a couple of pics of todays U.S Bulldogs and UK Bulldogs from ten years ago for us to compare and contrast. You'll still get flak from your critics of course, but it would I think give them a little less ammo to use, lol.

If this LA based bulldog and french bulldog owning couple are anything to go by Jemima, the bullies in Hollywood can get to shelter under the sun loungers!

Don't get me wrong I think that at even 36 David can take a mean free kick, and Victoria can design a mean frock or too.........but as rolemodels to dog owners they suck.

That said their dogs are not as exaggerated as some but just why does an uber-image conscious pair becomed obsessed with such physical deformity? And then promote that constantly on their twitter feed as desirable?

Excellent article in the New York Times Magazine. Disturbing how love for a dog or as breed can lead owners and breeders to become blind to the health problems of their dogs, even to the point where the amount they spend on veterinary bills becomes proof, not of how sick the breed is, but of how much they love their dogs

I think of it as the delicate orchid phenomenon. Not only does the expensive designed sickliness of the animal become proof of the greater love and devotion of the "consumer" -- pet owner -- but it is used to illustrate the superior skill of the producer.

Hey man, it's not easy to keep pumping out dogs that are that unfit and keep the offspring alive until sale!

Conversely, when I brag about how healthy and long-lived my critters are, how seldom they see a vet (and almost always for some work or play-related injury, almost never for any kind of illness), I can hear the sniffing and snorting from the die-hards of the Fancy Set -- hell, check the comment streams on some of the posts here for examples. Only peasant dogs conduct courtship, breed naturally, whelp freely, raise their vigorous young without a fuss -- and only a yokel is so negligent as to allow -- indeed, require -- them to do so. Only the low sort of dogs get torn up on barbed wire in the woods, tangle with a raccoon, fracture a toe climbing on rubble, get teeth kicked out by some hoofed critter. A True Fancier sweats to keep her dogs alive (and "properly groomed") and keeps them in bubble wrap to prevent such unsightly dings.

For them, selection is about perpetuating an elite class of Fanciers who make things more and more difficult for themselves in order to demonstrate their mastery of the self-referential world they've carved out of uncooperative animal flesh.

For me, selection is about making life easier for myself, for other people, and especially for the animals themselves.

That magazine article brought tears to my eyes. I'm a proud owner of a US-bred bulldog, and he's the light of my life. I was one of the naive pet consumers who fell in love with the breed without appreciating the suffering these dogs can endure. I'm very grateful that I've been in a position to spare no expense when it comes to ensuring that he remains healthy and happy. His pedigree is full of champions, which means that, although he's aesthetically a gorgeous example of his breed, he comes with the full range of potential complications. I had his nostrils widened as a young adult *just in case* their width ever caused him problems. His tonsils and extra tissue in his palate were removed in order to help prevent him from having breathing problems at a later date. He's had two surgeries on his knees.

He's 9 years old now, and we go on walks in excess of 45 minutes/day. He's in fantastic shape for his breed, and he even went for a swim last month. That being said I take care that he doesn't jump or overexert himself so that he doesn't aggravate his joints already carrying a heavy load. It makes my heart ache that he's had to undergo the surgeries and that he is vulnerable to more, but I am so grateful that he's in good condition today all things considered.

I've seen the Georgia bulldog mascot mentioned in the article, and it was disheartening to see the dog waddle around. One of the simplest things the BCA could do in the short-term is to change the standard from being overweight. If my boy were to enter the show ring in the States, as beautiful as he is he wouldn't win because I keep him trim. Beefiness is encouraged in the show ring. Shortly after I bought him and brought him along to a bulldog competition (not as a participant but just to show him off to the breeders I'd met while looking to buy a bulldog puppy), the immediate reaction was that I needed to fatten him up. That was the first time I realized after having purchased a bulldog that the ideal phenotype encouraged in the show ring simply wasn't good for the dog. He had a slim healthy shape, confirmed by his vet, and there was no way I was going to make his joints carry around unnecessary weight.

Would I have another bulldog? I completely understand the paradox involved with loving a breed and being blinded by that to the detriment of the dog. I understand the reaction these bulldog breeders have to being criticized. I would hate to see these incrediby affectionate and loving creatures disappear. But I wouldn't buy another one from a breeder in the form they currently are. Instead I'd rehome one from a bulldog rescue. Were I to break that rule it would only be to purchase a Leavitt bulldog or the similar Victorian bulldogge in the UK. (More likely it would still be a rescue dog though.)

One thing I've always been grateful for is the fact that the bulldog is so outlandishly expensive to purchase. It's at least some small comfort that such a high price weeds out to some extent people from making impulsive decisions to have one without fully considering the investment. If someone can afford to buy one, they're at least more likely to be able to afford to pay the vet bills to keep one healthy. Having said that, it's disheartening to see them become so popular in the States. As noted by the increase in numbers at the bulldog breed rescue referenced in the Times article, that hefty investment doesn't stop people from abandoning them. This breed is so people-orientated that it's unbearable to imagine them abandoned. (That's true for all dogs but for me particularly so with this breed.)

I hope the breed standard is sympathetically changed to produce a dog less burdened with health issues. For what it's worth my bulldog sees two different bulldog veterinary specialists. Both agree that, contrary to the average bulldog lifespans often quoted, their patients average closer to 12 years. I'm hoping my boy is no exception.

I'll admit that watching a bulldog strut down the road (like the one in that dog food commercial, Iams?) is incredibly attractive, and I couldn't even tell you why. I'd never own one, possibly a Levitt Bulldog, but the current standard English Bulldog? No way. The almost guaranteed health issues....not to mention the short life span!

The one of the cover is not too bad! Any idea who he/she is?I have to bring up the HD claims again here; bow legged breeds are often stated as having a high incidence of HD and radiographically they do BUT they don't seem to suffer arthritis as a consequence to the extent that other more 'normal' breeds (such as labradors) do. I suspect the bow legged stance keeps the radiographicaly poor hip pressed snuggly into it's socket.Bulldogs, pugs, bostons; all so 'wrong' and yet why do people keep buying them? As a vet I can only assume it's personality as I've never met an example of one of these breeds who didn't cope stoically with their problems (a problem in itself) and maintain a fantastic personality.Please breeders, judges; try to breed them a bit less exaggerated but with all that personality! VP

Heather 15:06 - Sorry, my comment wasn't clear. I was referring to the brachycephalic head looking like a baby's head*, and is a reason why brachycephalic breeds have become so popular. People like them because they remind them of human infants; this therefore tends to stir the same kind of emotions in them as babies do.

What I do NOT get, and am unlikely to EVER get, is how other people *apparently* emotionally resonate to these strange, distorted, piecemeal approximations of human neoteny. Because I am just not wired that way.

But then, I find Precious Moments figurines, Keane paintings, Bratz dolls, and other representations of stylized big head, big-eyed, pug-nosed uber-neoteny to be grotesque and disturbing, and I wonder about the emotional balance of people who find such things adowable instead of repulsive.

Because if there was a human child born with the proportions of a Precious Moments figurine, wouldn't a normal human response be to get the kid to a specialist? (Assuming it could live long enough to draw breath, which seems unlikely.) Wouldn't the predominant emotional response be shock and pity?

Shock and pity are certainly my visceral reaction to seeing a dog or cat with a nearly concave face attempting to draw enough air to perfuse his tissues. This is followed by anger and outrage drawn from the knowledge that someone did this deliberately -- that it was not some random birth defect, or even a byproduct of carelessness or ignorance in breeding decisions, but was actually what the breeder intended to achieve when the animal's parents were selected.

If we are moved by compassion when we see a crippled child begging on the streets of some third-world city, are we not also driven to outrage when we discover that some exploiting adult cut off the child's limb in order to make him a more pitiable and profitable beggar? For whom does that not represent the lowest depths to which our species can sink?

What if the exploiter, instead of employing kitchen-table surgery to lame his stable of beggars, was instead enslaving a colony of women and men whose children were all born with highly-visible birth defects that evoked pity in observers and kept the spare change flowing? Say, Seckel syndrome or megalencephaly? Would that beggar-pimp be less of a monster?

comparing the breeding of dogs to the exploitation and cruel intentional torture of children in third world countries ( or any where) is a common animal rights straw man along with comparing dogs kept as pets as "slaves". ( see many PETA/HSUS statements.) First of all..Dogs are not children and no one cuts off their limbs or intentionally "mains" them in order to send them to the streets to beg for money. You intimate that dog breeders breed dogs in a certain way for money.. and you know that is patently false. In most cases of pure bred dogs bred by hobby breeders especially those in the show ring there is no great monetary regard to be had in fact just the opposite.You also intimate that dog breeders are monsters.. do you include yourself in that genre?I just watched the National dog show.. The bulldog was lovely and even under the hot lights and close up cameras was moving freely about the ring at a pace that could be called a "jaunt" as they are meant to do. All of the dogs were fit and healthy and gorgeous.I would put it to you that the same person who give the beggar a dime on the street never gives a large amount of money to "cure" the ailments that beleaguer the actual child while as dog breeders especially pedigreed dog breeders we fund the much of the research that benefits ALL dogs ( even yours Heather) or are you all of the mind that if dogs are just "carefully out crossed' they will not need any further health research or further studies regarding disease or genetics? Poof all is cured with the advent of the out crossed mutt.. who needs actual money or research to make things better for dogs when you have "out crossing". How much money have you or your organization given this year to fund research? How many blood samples have you sent or DNA samples to the AKC Canine Health Foundation? How much money has Wayne Pacelle and the HSUS donated to the CHF? Where did the money go that was generated by the HSUS sponsored "Pure Bred Paradox" or whatever it was called. Surely if the cause is just the research should be supported by ALL owners of dogs and all organizations that claim to be in the best interest of dogs.

I have no doubt but that H$U$ and PETA will support issues that are not Animal Rights but instead really Animal Welfare. Just because H$U$ & PETA cretins join normal people in expressing concern about the progression of pedigree breeding towards severe anthropomorphic damage does not mean that expressing that concern turns it into an Animal Rights issue.

When breed clubs ignore the obvious damage their breeders are causing, then it is the breed clubs and their members who are marginalizing themselves. They should not expect to win this argument by screaming "Animal Rights, Animal Rights". ---Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA

"especially pedigreed dog breeders we fund the much of the research that benefits ALL dogs"

You seem very certain of this. Clearly you've seen something that demonstrates this. Perhaps a table showing which clubs and organisations donate to medical research. I'd love to see it too. Could you possibly show?

Also, why is so much research needed into genetic disease in dogs? I'd love to know your thoughts on this.

Rather more lighthearted, here is a link to a blog about a bulldog called Humphrey who is the therapy dog at a retirement community in NE Scotland. Glad to say he is less extreme and heavy in type , less wrinkled and not quite so breathless as some of the bulldogs in other photos herehttp://inchmarlo.wordpress.com/about/

"You intimate that dog breeders breed dogs in a certain way for money.. and you know that is patently false. In most cases of pure bred dogs bred by hobby breeders especially those in the show ring there is no great monetary regard to be had in fact just the opposite."

OK, Anon, assuming that you are correct and there's no money to be made in breeding dogs (and I disagree, but that's another argument), breeders want to sell puppies because they want to win ribbons and dog showing is an expensive hobby. So its not incorrect at all to point out that the greatly exaggerated and distorted features that win in the show ring and that certain people find adorable when we know perfectly well that such distorted features are not healthy for them.But how can you argue with a crowd who wanted that poor bulldog on TV last night (and also the Peke) who were capable of walking into a show ring without getting out of breath and thinking it was wonderful? The bulldog was snorting and panting heavily, he was waddling and his back legs were doing a weird side-to-side hop, and the poor Peke was so out of breath that he kind of collapsed into a sit in the down and back. The handler actually carried him into the ring so he wouldn't have to walk that far.Heather's comments, while disturbing and very uncomfortable were spot on and while its the public who love their little snorting flat face beasts that will pay top dollar for them who hold some of the blame, its also the people who produce them and inform JQP about how its all OK who hold the blame.

http://www.akcchf.org/about-us/website for the AKC Canine Health Foundation. you can find many clubs and private donors here.. if fact you may want to donate yourself..wow wouldn't that be something rare? if you go to the site please take a moment to sign up for the weekly email on health in canines.. they send out very interesting podcast videos on studies that are ongoing. very informative.

show me where any Animal rights groups has donated ONE THIN DIME to promote animal health.. show me where this blogger has donated any money to the AKC CHF fund.. show me where any of you who bitch and complain have helped. Nope much easier to 'armchair quarter back" and say wow did you see that Bulldog.. nothing like my squatting, creeping wonderful border collie. who would want one of those Bulldogs well I would for one.. and never a creeping squatting, sneaky skinny border collie will darken my door but at least I can say.. to each his own..unlike those of you here who compare breeding dogs to the intentional maiming of children.. how very noble of you.. want to make a difference in that arena.. go to India..while you are there.. pick up a few stray dogs to "improve" your breeding program.. Hybrid vigor and all of that.Pekes were never meant to run around a show ring like an athlete.. they are "sleeve dogs" meant to ride in the sleeves of their owners. He is carried into the ring because of time limitations and the fact that Pekes are MEANT to be carried.Bulldogs are meant to move with a rolling gait which is exactly what this one did.. the judge took only a second to look in the mouth exactly like all of the others.. I don't know if any of you have ever actually been in a televised dog show.. I have.. instructions are clear.. move quickly and stand on the tape. I did not see the BD snorting or waddling.. I saw something completely different.. but then I am a supporter of Bulldogs.. and know many people who own happy healthy specimens of the breed. Beauty , eye, beholder.still waiting for Jemima to get me the stats on who received the largess from the Pedigreed Paradox conference? U Penn? AKC/CHF? or the HSUS itself?I am not sure why some questions why we need to study genetics in dogs?? would you prefer we "breed " our way out of questions we have about the dog genome? and really do you think we can do that/ why would you question the need for science?

Can we PLEASE put to bed this claim being made by so many on here that it is all Joe Publics fault for "wanting" dogs like this? It isn't. Here's why:

The public are told "do your research" before buying a pedigree dog. This IS good advice. Trouble is, where do you do your research? The Kennel Club would seem like a good place to start. So pay a visit to the KC website and you'll see lots of photo's - usually of show dogs. If you already know what breed you're interested in then the KC will point you in the direction of the relevant breed club. So you go onto their website. Where you see lots of pictures of show dogs and the results of recent shows (reinforcing the perception that show dogs are the be all and end all of the breed). Now, there are a few breed club websites which are pretty good, offering honest, up to date information and advice about breed specific health problems. But most of them are pretty poor, often making light of the real health problems the breed suffers from, and some of them just lie and say "Everything is peachy with these dogs". And these are supposed to be the "experts" within the breed. The breed club members themselves will, by and large tow the line if they are asked about breed specific health problems. To do otherwise runs the risk of being kicked out of the club. So we can see there is a big problem here, with the public being given bad advice by the very people who they could reasonably expect to give them the very best advice. The media also show pictures of winning show dogs, dogs which it is proclaimed are "correct" for the breed. So it's little wonder the public "want" dogs like this, they are told by the "experts" that these dogs are "correct", that the health concerns aren't so bad, that PDE was all a big fuss over nothing.

And before a breeder comes on with the usual "it's not our dogs, only 2% of dogs go to shows", well that's a non starter. It may indeed be the case that around 2% of all dogs registered end up going being shown, but that doesn't mean the other 98% were all bred by people who don't show. If only one in four of a show dogs litter ended up being shown, where do the other 75% go to? Pet homes for the most part. So the chances are that the non showing pedigree pet dog would have originally come from a show breeder, or at least bred from show lines. And when the new owner does eventually decide to breed their dog, the advice they got when buying them in the first place leads them to the conclusion that they have a "correct" type dog, so they look for other "correct" type dogs to breed them with. And the end result is more dogs of the same type, who are then registered with the KC/ breed club. The public don't know any better because the "expert" advice from the breed clubs and KC, and the images they see in the media gives them a distorted picture of what is "correct". Meanwhile the KC and breed clubs are happy to take the annual subs and registration fees, and happy to proclaim that there is little if nothing wrong at all within the breed.

Show judges don't help either. They habitually choose typey dogs as winners, ignoring the (often already flawed) breed standard because the dog "looks amazing", or because its owner is a friend or friend of a friend. So the members of the public who go to shows see dogs with exaggerated features walking (if you can call it that)away with a Best of Breed or Best in Show, which only reinforces an already distorted view of what is "correct".

So who is really to blame here? The public for wanting what they are told is "correct", or the "experts" within the breed who all too often give a distorted view of the facts?

Being a member of the public who doesn't show, I think I'm pretty well qualified to tell you what the public REALLY wants. We want healthy dogs, good advice and the TRUTH about health problems. Yes, some people do want cute dogs and to some people a flat face looks cute. But they'd rather have healthy and cute combined. And if they can't have both, they'd sooner pick healthy. But they are constantly told (by the "experts") that what is being bred today IS perfectly healthy. So whos fault is it really?

"...still waiting for Jemima to get me the stats on who received the largess from the Pedigreed Paradox conference? U Penn? AKC/CHF? or the HSUS itself?"

I am not privy to the conference's finances but I would very much doubt it made any money. Speakers were not paid, but the sponsors (HSUS, UPenn and the RSPCA) covered speakers' flights, hotel and meals and of course there was a venue to be paid for. I think it was estimated that about 60 attended. I don't know the cost of tickets but don't think it would have been enough to cover the costs.

Anon wrote "show me where any Animal rights groups has donated ONE THIN DIME to promote animal health.. show me where this blogger has donated any money to the AKC CHF fund.. show me where any of you who bitch and complain have helped"

Well, my contribution to promoting health in my breed is by breeding fit and healthy setters who can still do the work they were originally bred for, by selling the healthy puppies I breed to people who also care about breeding healthy functional setters, by talking as openly and truthfully as possible about health problems in my breed (which doesnt always go down too well with other people in the breed)The money I pay for health testing to my vets, the AHT, the BVA hip and eye panels, helps to maintain bodies who promote the breeding of healthy dogs, and in the case of the AHT also carry out research. The money I pay to the Kennel Club for their services like registration of litters helps to pay for their record keeping and online services , like the online health data and Mate select, and enables them to make grants for research to the AHT and elsewhere.I may only breed one litter most years, but a litter of 12 this year, cost around £275 to register and get pedigrees from the KC. And in an average year I spend several hundred pounds on hip scoring, eye tests and DNA tests (in 2010 it was over £1000)And I reckon that gives me the right to complain about breeders who dont put the same amount of effort into breeding fit, healthy and functional dogs

Dalriach You seem to do everything right although going by JH's thoughts your higher than average COI litter may not have been acceptable and could have ended up on here being ridiculed.Can I ask how you would feel if your breed had been ridiculed just because of some bad breeders especially when you know you are doing it all properly

Anon, somebody picked ONE litter from the twenty IRWS litters I have bred which had a higher COI (22%) than the average for the breed . I'm in a small breed with a very small gene pool, where it is very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve a low COI, and some breeders are producing litters with COIs of 35% or higher. If you work out the COIs for ALL my twenty litters, using ten generations, then work out the average COI for those litters, then compare that with the average COI for the breed in the UK , using ten generations, over the same period, you will find mine are well BELOW the average for the breedAnd if some breeders in my breed were being criticised, with good evidence, for breeding unhealthy dogs with serious confomational faults , I would find the criticism entirely reasonable - I certainly wouldnt try to defend them. For example I am not happy about the identity of IRWS with LOPRA currently being kept secret, nor about the practice of not submitting hip xrays for scoring if it appears the dog is dysplastic, and I will say that quite openly

Anon wrote: "... website for the AKC Canine Health Foundation. you can find many clubs and private donors here.."

--- Right, Anon; that kind of funding by many pedigree breeders is what I call a combination of a guilty-conscience and paying lip service. I have found that when the researchers not only find the genetic cause of the disorder but also the solution to it (which calls for the breeders to follow breeding protocols to breed the disorder out of future generations), those same breeders ignore the advice because following those breeding protocols would interfere with their ability to continue breeding.

Anon also wrote: "... I did not see the BD snorting or waddling.. I saw something completely different.. but then I am a supporter of Bulldogs.. and know many people who own happy healthy specimens of the breed. Beauty , eye, beholder."

--- It's called breed-blindness, Anon, and you are suffering from it, big time.

To the Collie-hating anonymous: no one here has an issue with a Bulldog personality of even type, just with the physical malformations that AFFECT THEIR VERY HEALTH. This is whats amazing to me. Your "to each his own.." results in dogs who cannot breath normally! This is not preferring one breed over another, its an issue of welfare.

"unlike those of you here who compare breeding dogs to the intentional maiming of children.. how very noble of you.. want to make a difference in that arena.. go to India..while you are there.. pick up a few stray dogs to "improve" your breeding program.. Hybrid vigor and all of that."

Anon: meet strawman.

"Pekes were never meant to run around a show ring like an athlete.. they are "sleeve dogs" meant to ride in the sleeves of their owners. "

We are not talking about "running like an athlete." There really isn't anything remotely athletic about a down-and-back in a show ring. The fact the poor guy is panting heavily and falling down on his haunches after such a short walk (shortened for him, in fact, because of his inability to do it). Even if the original breed were in fact designed to be non athletic lap warmers, the fact that walking 10 feet exhausts him should mean that the humans in charge of this breed should change it! Pekes of course were not the flat faced, wheezing deformed slipper-looking dogs that we see in today's show ring when they were introduced as a breed. There's a difference between non-athletic and so deformed they can hardly breathe.

Lets consider the rest of the toy group, also designated as lap dogs...they all managed a down-and-back without collapsing in exhaustion.

Go look up some old pictures of Pekes when they were introduced to the West.

"Bulldogs are meant to move with a rolling gait which is exactly what this one did.. the judge took only a second to look in the mouth exactly like all of the others."

Let's be clear: Bulldogs are only "meant" to have a rolling gait because some human decided it was neat-o and bred for it. Its not healthy, its not functional and its sad. The bulldogs of the past didn't have this extreme conformation because a dog with it is not functional for anything but amusing the people who own it.

"but then I am a supporter of Bulldogs.. and know many people who own happy healthy specimens of the breed. Beauty , eye, beholder.'

And I wonder, what do you define as a healthy bulldog? Can they breathe freely? Can they run in warm temperatures? How long do they live? Do they have skin problems? Because again, my dense friend, its not about beauty. Its about health and function. If you choose to breed a dog who is essentially DEFORMED because you find it beautiful, you are doing the wrong thing, and Heather's uncomfortable analogy applies to you.

don't hate Collies.. never said I did.. in fact unlike most posters here I don't "hate' any dogs.. or breed of dogs.

CHF does not 'beg for donations" but they ask for help and get it.thank goodness. from breeders and others who actually want to make lives for dogs better through research and science.. not just grasping at "straws" ( a nod in your direction Heather)taek for exaple the discovery of the DNA that allows for tesing of lens luxation.. Rod are you telling that breeders will not use that to improve their breeds? do you actually believe that breeders would breed dogs that they know might go blind when they can test for it and eventually eliminate the disease? I think not.. I do not suffer from breed blindness.. but I did support the study with samples from my dogs and know many other breeders that have done the same thing so any "breed blindness" I suffer from .. at least i have contributed to ending it. how about you?

"Stick two hollow swizzle sticks up your cute little pug nose. Find some helpful person to inject epoxy around them. Now breath through the little straws. For the rest of your miserable existence."

Can I add to the homework please?

You must pick a time when you are suffering from laryngitis. And put on 6 big coats.Now get on all fours and eat from a bowl like a dog.Be careful not to inhale your food whilst trying to eat and breathe at the same time as this may lead to inhalation pneumonia.

You may get some strange looks to start with, but given time passers by will accept this as the norm for you so not to worry.

Anon wrote: "...Rod are you telling that breeders will not use that to improve their breeds? do you actually believe that breeders would breed dogs that they know might go blind when they can test for it and eventually eliminate the disease? I think not.."

--- Anon, the answer is Yes to both questions. I have witnessed widespread and adamant refusal of nearly every breeder of cavaliers to follow the Mitral Valve Disease Breeding Protocol (designed to eliminate early-onset MVD in three generations) and the Syringomyelia Breeding Protocol (designed to greatly reduce the incidence of SM in future generations). These protocols were designed by researchers after years of research funded by cavalier breeders and owners. The two USA cavalier breed clubs even refuse to recommend those two protocols, and in some instances, even acknowledge the existence of the protocols. And, as for breeding for blindness, consider the Dalmatian.

Anon, if you "think not", then you are thinking with an absence of information. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA

During the breed judging, that same desperate whale-eyed Peke sort of half-fell onto his shoulder during the half-court down and back. They did not post videos of the rest of the Pekes going for BoB.

Ladies and gentlemen, WE HAVE A WINNER.

Is it just the sample of videos to which I have subjected myself, or do the dogs at this particular show also overwhelmingly look miserable, trying to avoid their handlers, just stressed and pissy and don't wanna be there, especially with this jerk? And the handlers rough and ham-fisted in their management? And I say that, just to be clear, in contrast to the baseline demeanor of a heavily-campaigned, professionally-handled show dog.

well then you outlook is what you observe is quite different that what i have seen over the period of almost 50 years in pedigreed dogs, RodHeather .. many of the dogs .. even the larger ones went half way down and back I would guess in the interest of time.Many dogs were not used to the close up of the cameras.. and as I stated .. if you have very been on TV and had a camera stuck right in your face you know it can be disconcerting even or maybe especially to a dog.I did not see the Peke "fall on its shoulder" at any time..I did see him break into a gallop at one point..and he was quite the showman ..as her has always been.. as he has been to many shows... "whale-eyed"? "desperate".. anthropomorphism creeps in again.

So you say "I am not privy to the conference's finances but I would very much doubt it made any money. Speakers were not paid, but the sponsors (HSUS, UPenn and the RSPCA) covered speakers' flights, hotel and meals and of course there was a venue to be paid for. I think it was estimated that about 60 attended. I don't know the cost of tickets but don't think it would have been enough to cover the costs." how on earth can teh RSPCA justify spending so much money on this ? that mustof cost them tens or thousands of punds if nota great deals more, next time I see one of their Chuggers on street perhaps they can tell me why they can afford to do this but no take dogs into their shelters, or give single penny to the new cancer centre at the AHT, they really have now lost the plot!

Rod, don't forget all the nice folks who breed merle to merle. On purpose. The genetic test for that is the human eyeball. The consequences are well-established. And the registries allow it, the breed clubs don't eject those who practice it.

For the record, I was one of those who (a) advised Jemima not to speak at this conference, due to its sponsors, and (b) would have been first in line to attend if it had different sponsors.

But which is it? OMFG! THEY MADE MONEEZ ON THIS HEALTH-RELATED CONFERENCE AND DIDN'T SHARE!!! or OMFG! THEY SPENT MONEEZ ON THIS HEALTH-RELATED CONFERENCE JUST LIKE I ACCUSE THEM OF NEVER DOING AND SHOULDN'T HAVE!!!

Anon, we all spend money where we think it will be well spent on things we care about - whether we are individuals or organisations. For some that may be the new cancer centre at the AHT; for others it might be in trying to raise awareness about, or find solutions for, the purebred dog problem. On the latter, the RSPCA has put its hand in its pocket first by writing/publishing its dog breeding report and,second, by funding the development of proper data surveillance for all companion animals (VEctAR).

Love how me reckoning that no one made any money out of the conference has been translated into the RSPCA spending "tens of thousands of punds if nota great deals more".

Incidentally, the new cancer centre at the AHT is a veterinary treatment centre that will charge its clients; it isn't subsidised. That's how it will, ultimately, be able to repay the £1.5m loan (a loan, not a donation) that the Kennel Club has agreed to help fund the new centre.

The RSPCA's core business is animal cruelty - not funding research into/treatment of disease.

Just been offered a bulldog for free by a guy who uses them in the Andalucian summer(40 degrees +)for working bulls and cattle here (as well as boar hunting, farm guarding etc); although strangely he calls them Alanos. Looking at old prints they seem not to be too dissimilar to the old continental bulldog. I should tell him that his dogs need profuse wrinkles to "channel away the blood" as well as the undershot jaw "to breathe while holding the bulls" and the warped dimensions etc etc. These hillbillies don't know anything about dogs do they? Don't they read the breed club's standards and explanations for said standard? PMSL

SUBSCRIBE TO PDE - THE BLOG

Search This Blog

About Me

I grew up with pedigree dogs - English Setters, Great Danes, Labradors and, most recently, Flatcoated Retrievers. Today, I share my home with an assortment of dogs, purebred and mutts. In 2008, I directed Pedigree Dogs Exposed, a BBC documentary which uncovered the extent of health and welfare problems in pedigree dogs. The film has now been shown in more than 20 countries. Campaigning for improved purebred dog health is now a great passion - one fuelled by the fear that those who currently view themselves as the guardians of pedigree dogs are, often unwittingly, the agents of their demise.
My mission, then, is to continue to highlight where things have gone wrong and to encourage breeders and Kennel Clubs to embrace reform - particularly when it comes to harmful phenotypes and inbreeding.